Public option for student loans in reconciliation bill

by: Chris Bowers

Mon Mar 22, 2010 at 14:30


Although it has gone largely unnoticed--and perhaps because it went largely unnoticed--a public option did end up in the reconciliation bill.  It is a public option for student loans, however:

The student aid initiative, which House Democrats attached to their final amendments to the health-care bill, would overhaul the student loan industry, eliminating a $60 billion program that supports private student loans with federal subsidies and replacing it with government lending to students. The House amendments will now go to the Senate.

By ending the subsidies and effectively eliminating the middleman, the student loan bill would generate $61 billion in savings over 10 years, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

This is exactly what we wanted for the health care bill.  Instead of just subsidizing the purchase of private insurance, cut out the middleman and have the government sell insurance directly.  It would save a ton of money, and reduce the cost of the insurnace.

Hell, for health reform, we only wanted a public option like that in addition to, and as one alternative to, providing subsidies to purchasing private insurance.  The plan was never to just eliminate the subsidies to purchase private insurance at all.  The health reform public option was a smaller ask.

But, it didn't happen.  Part of me thinks that it didn't happen explicitly because all the dirty frakking hippies were the ones pushing for a public health insurance option.  And, if we had been pushing for this student loan public option, it probably would have been defeated, too.

Because that's how politics works: defeat the dirty hippies, no matter what they are asking for, simply for the sake of saying you defeated the dirty hippies.  Thus, you can claim victory over the dirty hippies, and show you stoof up to their freakishness. Then, tell everyone that if you didn't defeat the dirty hippies, Democrats would lose everything.  From the leadership to the rank and file, the Democratic ecosystem is rife with that belief.

That a public option ended up in the reconciliation bill, just not the public option we were looking for, is as clear proof as there can be that the health reform public option campaign was winnable.  But, perhaps what killed it was that the DFH's were the ones asking for it.

Chris Bowers :: Public option for student loans in reconciliation bill

Tags: , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

You're reading too much into this... (4.00 / 2)
The reason why we got a public option in the student loan bill is simply that the bill was a reconciliation bill from the start.

Had HCR not needed a supermajority for cloture, we would have easily gotten a PO.

Also, the student loan bill came as a surprise to the lobbyists.  They didn't think it would be merged with HCR and passed so quickly.  They knew it was hovering around, but when they added it onto HCR two weeks ago, they were caught flat footed.

While you are right that the conservadems needed to beat up on hippies, which they did successfully, it's only because they were relevant due to cloture rules.  If the Senate operated via simple majority all the time, the PO would be law today.

REID: Voting against us was never part of our arrangement!
SPECTER: I am altering the deal! Pray I don't alter it any further!
REID: This deal keeps getting worse all the time!


Maybe (4.00 / 5)
But, then again, we are about to pass a reconciliation bill that goes around cloture, and there isn't either a Medicare buy-in, or a new public option program.

[ Parent ]
I believe Chris answers that (0.00 / 0)
question in this post.

[ Parent ]
That's fine if you believe you can blame it on dirty hippies (4.00 / 1)
But from my point of view that's just a bullshit excuse for not addressing who sold it out.  It's history so let's move on.  I suspect in 2012 a lot of us won't forget this bill.

"Oh. My. God. .... We're doomed." -- Paul Krugman
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.c...">http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.c...">http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.c...


[ Parent ]
I'm not sure that's where he is placing (0.00 / 0)
the blame.

[ Parent ]
This begs the question, though... (4.00 / 2)
Of why the PO isn't in the reconciliation bill then?  It passed the House before and theoretically should've been able to pass the House again... If a Simple Majority would've won in the Senate, why didn't they just pass it again and let the reconciliation rules let the Senate pass the PO with a simple majority?

[ Parent ]
because the insurance companies didn't support it (4.00 / 1)
And that's who the leader of the Democratic Party made his deals with.

"Oh. My. God. .... We're doomed." -- Paul Krugman
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.c...">http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.c...">http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.c...


[ Parent ]
Is two weeks not enough time (2.67 / 3)
for the lobbyists to tell their pet Representatives to vote down the reconciliation fix?

[ Parent ]
Uprated for TR abuse. (4.00 / 1)
JDS, if I see any more TRs from you without comments explaining the reason, I'm just going to uprate.  Just because you disagree with a comment or particular commenter is not grounds for giving TRs.  Grow up.

Health insurance is not health care.
If you don't fight, you can't win.
Never give up. Never Surrender.
Watch out for flying kabuki.


[ Parent ]
Thanks Gabriel D (0.00 / 0)
I think JDS is on a jihad against me because I TRed one of his inflammatory responses to bruhrabbit, which I think really did deserve a zero.  Now he's TRing practically everything I post.

Watch, he's gonna TR this comment too...


[ Parent ]
re: student loans (0.00 / 0)
Hell, for health reform, we only wanted a public option like that in addition to, and as one alternative to, providing subsidies to purchasing private insurance.  The plan was never to just eliminate the subsidies to purchase private insurance at all.  The health reform public option was a smaller ask.

so, is this like single-payer for student loans?


It does not address present loan borrowers. so, not really. (0.00 / 0)


[ Parent ]
re: borrowers (0.00 / 0)
by borrowers you mean loans that have already been given or loans that will be given in the future?

[ Parent ]
As far as I understand to loans orginating starting 2014, but I have not followed (4.00 / 3)
it closely. So I am not sure if that's true of all aspects of the bill.

However, the student loan issue misses the point. The real problem in education is cost, not financing. This is an okay start, but the cost issue, which is at hyper inflationary rates of increase per year is the real problem.

There are a core bundle of issues- health care, education, etc- that I follow due to their impact on the middle class versus the impact of stagnant wages that suggest our middle class is in decline.

A good person to read on the subject is Elizabeth Warren. She gets it.  This post is rambling, but I wanted to put the policy changes in context. They are not bad. They are a good start unlike the health care bill, but they are just an incremental start.  I give Obama props on this, but there is a lot of work if education is going to become affordable for the middle class again including asking what level of education is really required to go into the work force. Whether professors are overpaid, etc.


[ Parent ]
Nah, punching DFH's is merely a side benefit (4.00 / 3)
of accommodating corporate power.

The PO's not in there because Big Pharma and/or AHIP and/or the hospital industry didn't want it in there. Someday I suppose we'll find out whether the PO was explicitly dealt away.  


"Someday" may be today (4.00 / 3)
Have you seen this?

[ Parent ]
Right (0.00 / 0)
Well, that establishes that Obama dealt away the best PO, one that paid at Medicare rates. That alone is outrageous. What we don't know at this point is whether he also dealt away lesser POs, like the one that the House passed.  

[ Parent ]
I think you await conclusive proof for the obvious (0.00 / 0)
While you await something that only you apparently can define, everyone else is going to move along.  If you still doubt Obama dealt it away then you are dealing with the past.  

No offense meant, but it is obvious except to the most strident Obama backers.  

"Oh. My. God. .... We're doomed." -- Paul Krugman
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.c...">http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.c...">http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.c...


[ Parent ]
Did you just call me a strident Obama backer? (4.00 / 2)
And no, it's not obvious that Obama formally pledged to make sure the PO wasn't part of any bill, although ultimately what accounted for his opposition to the PO probably isn't important. What matters is his opposition.

FDL's statement has it right (from Quick Hits)

We saw in the last days what President Obama was capable of when he truly put the force of his political skill behind an effort. But as time wore on, the mountain of data unearthed could lead to only one conclusion: this bill, with its eerie similarities to a plan written by insurance industry lobbyists in 2008, was what the president wanted.


[ Parent ]
LOL (4.00 / 2)
You know me better than that!  But you're chasing rainbows.  How is what FDL said different than what I said.  Obama wanted what the insurance lobby wanted and he dealt away the PO.  Quit trying to deny this by only accepting it when you know the exact wording of such a "deal."   I'm sure it was never in writing.  If you want to cling to this rainbow, ok.  Let's not make a a deal breaker between you and me.  It's history.  I'll never believe Obama didn't deal away the PO.  The facts point more my way than not.  

"Oh. My. God. .... We're doomed." -- Paul Krugman
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.c...">http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.c...">http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.c...


[ Parent ]
Gotchya, I pretty much agree (4.00 / 1)


[ Parent ]
Yes, he dealt away those lesser POs too (0.00 / 0)
I should've linked to an older but better Mogulescu piece, this one, that quotes an NYT article [emphasis mine]:

"Several hospital lobbyists involved in the White House deals said it was understood as a condition of their support that the final legislation would not include a government-run health plan paying-Medicare rates...or controlled by the secretary of health and human services. 'We have an agreement with the White House that I'm very confident will be seen all the way through conference', one of the industry lobbyists, Chip Kahn, director of the Federation of American Hospitals, told a Capitol Hill newsletter...Industry lobbyists say they are not worried [about a public option.] 'We trust the White House,' Mr. Kahn said."

"Controlled by the secretary of health and human services = negotiated rates, like the one passed by the House.


[ Parent ]
re: lobbies (0.00 / 0)
can anyone comment on the size/power of these lobbies (pharma, hospital, ahip)?

I understand pharma is the biggest but how do the other 2 compare?


[ Parent ]
There also wasn't organized opposition (4.00 / 1)
Nobody really knew it was in there, so nobody knew to object.  I think this would have been a lot harder as a stand-alone bill.

That said, there definitely deeply ingrained cultural resentments against agitating progressives within the power structure.  That will probably always be true, since we are, in fact, seeking to reduce their power.


I really don't like this meme (4.00 / 5)
of using the term "public option" regarding the student loans.  It seems like it's intended to confuse people about what we got and what we didn't.

We did not get a public option.  Period.  And the process in which we didn't get it over the last year was despicable, dishonest and probably corrupt.  The president made a committment to the hospital industry that there would be no national public option in the HIR bill, and did all of this while pledging his support for it.  And at the end of the day, he thwarted every effort to put a public option into this bill, right down to the last minute.  Dishonestly.  

No spin about a public option for student loans is going to change that.


USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS
Powered by: SoapBlox